Content area
Full Text
Abstract: Soft power is an increasingly important concept that attempts to explain how states and organisations shape shared interests across national borders and between political, economic, social and cultural spaces. However, many of the theoretical and methodological flaws identified by scholars engaging with the term are familiar to Media & Communications research, and particularly to the sub-field termed 'cultural imperialism' during the 1970s and 1980s. This article builds upon the insights of research that explores contemporary theoretical innovations upon the cultural imperialism field, and applies it to a case study of German soft power. The aim is to explore the usefulness of the 'spatio-temporal turn' as a way of interpreting the epistemological and ontological consequences of German soft power strategies. The study includes empirical material on the recent Land of Ideas and Year of Germany campaigns.
Key words: spatio-temporal turn, diplomacy, media studies, soft power, Germany
Soft power refers to a form of communicative influence capable of eliciting cooperation across borders, and arises from the attractiveness of a nation's values, culture, and policies (Nye, 1990, 2004, 2008; Gilboa, 2008: 61). It engages with an international context in which states are no longer the practical 'units' of International Relations, in which an array of 'boundary-spanning actors' are capable of impacting upon different areas of international affairs, and where public opinion is often considered the last remaining superpower (Gregory, 2011; Kelley, 2010; Melissen, 2005; Hayden, 2012; Pamment, 2013a). While this paints the picture of a context for which the concept of soft power seems essential, scholars have also noted its insufficiency; Simon Anholt's observation that the awkward juxtaposition of soft and power gives the impression of a global 'pillow fight' is a case in point (House of Lords, 2013: 5). In many respects, soft power repeats the theoretical and methodological oversights of the cultural imperialism field, for which the inability to explain how foreign influences are appropriated within dynamic cultures, the interaction between agendas and intentions encapsulated by 'national' policies, and the complex interconnectivity of different areas of foreign affairs seem to represent critical flaws (Thompson, 1995; van Elteren, 2003).2
The purpose of this article is to analyse some of the major questions implied by soft power practices through a theoretical focus on the late-20th century...